Here's my take on it: if I reply to a node anyway, I point out that PERL only exists as Inline::PERL. I try to frame it as a half-joke, in company of a hopefully helpful reply. Writing a reply that only consists of a perl vs Perl vs PERL comment seems uncalled-for to me.
Is perl vs. PERL vs. Perl a triviality? I would say so (counter arguments welcome),
I object. Names contribute to identity, and are important to most humans. I still flinch a bit when somebody spells my name and nick as mortiz, which happens quite often.
And I do care about Perl. If somebody with sufficient technical background asks me about my hobbies, I don't say "I program", but "I program Perl".
1) "Don't mention the war" Ignore it. Anyone staying longer with perl will adopt the right spelling by observation and mimicry fast enough
Possible. But then other people come to the site, and see that it's spelled PERL in the heart of the Perl community, nobody objects - it must be right.
2) "I mentioned it once, but I think I got away with it" Put in lots of 'perl' in your answer. Instead of "Use split to extract the data" say "perl has the split function to extract the data". He won't have a chance against his subconsciousness
He has a very good chance. Learning works self-reinforcing, and writing stuff typically makes you remember things better than if you just read it.
Modern Psychology has numbers for the relative effectiveness of learning through reading and writing, which of course I can't find right now, but all the results I've seen so far suggest that the vast major learns better from writing.
In reply to Re: To Perl or not to PERL.
by moritz
in thread To Perl or not to PERL.
by jethro
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |